The Kerala High Court has held that law does not recognise live-in relationships as marriage  and when two parties decide to live together by virtue of a mere agreement, and not in accordance with any personal law or the Special Marriage Act, they cannot claim it to be a marriage or seek divorce.

A division bench comprising Justice A Muhamed Mustaque and Justice  Sophy Thomas observed that the law accords recognition only if the marriage is solemnised in accordance with personal law or in accordance with secular law like the Special Marriage Act.

“Marriage as a social institution, as affirmed and recognized in legislation, reflects the social and moral ideals followed in the larger society. The Law is yet to recognize the live-in relationship as a marriage. The Law accords recognition only if the marriage is solemnized in accordance with the personal law or in accordance with secular law like the Special Marriage Act. If the parties decide to live together by virtue of an agreement, that by itself will not qualify them to claim it as a marriage and claim divorce thereon,” the court said in its judgment last Thursday.

The court said  that the law does not recognise live-in relationships as marriage and hence divorce could not be sought as a means of separation.

“If the parties decide to live together by virtue of an agreement, that by itself will not qualify them to claim it as a marriage and claim divorce thereon. The law recognises divorce as a mean of separating a legal marriage,” the court observed

The court  said that divorce is only a means of separating a legal marriage and while live-in relationships may be recognised for other purposes, it is not recognised for divorce.

“The law recognizes divorce as a means of separating a legal marriage. There may be a situation where the relationship qualifies for the creation of reciprocal obligations or duties elsewhere. But that does not mean that such a relationship can be recognized for the purpose of divorce,”  the court said

The appellant-couple, one a Hindu and the other a Christian, had entered into a registered agreement in February 2006 to live together. They lived as husband and wife for a long time and also had a child together.

Since they wished to separate and end the relationship they approached the Family Court with a joint petition for mutual divorce under the Special Marriage Act.

However,  the Family Court refused to grant them divorce taking note of the fact that they were not married under the Special Marriage Act.Following this,  the appellants  approached the High Court against the order of the Family Court.

The  High Court held that the law does not recognise live-in relationships as marriage and hence divorce could not be sought as a means of separation.Divorce can be allowed only when the marriage between the parties is recognised under a personal or secular law, the court observed.

The Court also held that the Family Court had no jurisdiction to entertain such a claim as it can only deal with marriages recognised by law. Instead of dismissing the petition holding that the marriage was not solemnized under the Special Marriage Act, the Family Court ought to have held that the petition was not maintainable, the Court observed and directed the Family Court to return the petition, holding it to be not maintainable.